New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com (https://blackandgold.com/community/)
-   Saints (https://blackandgold.com/saints/)
-   -   In response to WhoDat's Blanco vs. Benson (https://blackandgold.com/saints/9003-response-whodats-blanco-vs-benson.html)

VooDoo 05-17-2005 04:17 PM

In response to WhoDat's Blanco vs. Benson
 
This is in response to WhoDat's Blanco vs. Benson article.

IMHO, WhoDat is trying to put Mr. Tom Benson on trail. But the last time I checked Mr. Tom Benson had broken no laws.

And speaking from a business owner's view-point, all Tom Benson has done is "posture" to get the best deal he can for his business. That business being the New Orleans Saints.

WhoDat basically wants to hold Mr. Benson to an incredibly high standard. WhoDat suggests Mr. Benson is up to no good by refusing to open his books. But Mr. Benson is under no obligation to open his books to Blanco or anyone else. That doesn't make Benson dishonest. (as WhoDat is suggesting) If anyone has ever had their business records looked at by a government agency, then you know that the goverment can twist and manipulate "figures" to say basically whatever they want. Never trust the government to tell you how much profit you are making. That might be why businesses hire accounting firms.

Then there's the yacht issue. The truth is that Benson could afford this yacht before he received one penny from Louisiana. If you believe WhoDat, then Benson went and cashed the check from the State of Louisiana and ran down to the boat store and purchased a 20-million dollar yacht. What WhoDat doesn't talk about is Benson's net-worth before he received the money from the State. Making a purchase under a company name isn't unusal. In fact, it's quite common. I own part of a time-share condo in Florida that's purchased under my company name. It's a tax write-off because I say I use it for business. It's just business.

In fact ... this whole Blanco vs. Benson situation is nothing but business. One side trying to feel the other side out.

Benson isn't the bad guy. He's not telling the whole truth. And he's not going to. Neither does Donald Trump or Bill Gates. It's just business.

But if you think Blanco is shooting you staight ... you might ought to rethink that.

WhoDat painted Benson as the bad guy. Don't be fooled. Benson could sell this team and buy a whole fleet of luxury yachts. And a few mansions too. Maybe a private island.

Benson wants the Saints to stay in Nawlins. If I had to support someone it would be Benson.

The mysterious 360-million that Blanco found should make her feel much better about the situation.

WhoDat 05-17-2005 04:31 PM

RE: In response to WhoDat
 
What I see is a statement devoid of any facts. That's a nice opinion, but it's totally unsupported.

Benson is under no obligation to open his books - you're right about that. But the State is under no obligation to give him the stadium he is demanding either. Benson claims to want a new stadium and to stay in New Orleans. The State claims to want to keep the team there. The State says it is willing to work with Benson to make the team profitable, but has doubts about it being unprofitable now (in fact, it is profitable). Benson is making claims about his inability to make money, but won't provide any truth. The outside agencies suggest that what Benson is saying is untrue (see Forbes).

So you're right, Benson doesn't HAVE to open his books, but he SHOULD, in good faith. Moreover, the fact that he refuses to makes him look suspicious.


Additionally, the fact the Tom Benson bought a yacht is not the issue. There are two issue related to the yacht which you and many others seem not to be able to grasp. First, TOM BENSON did NOT buy a yacht. Tom Benson does not currently own a yacht. Tom Benson's COMPANY, which gets money from the State of LA owns a yacht. Do you understand the difference? A multi-millionare doesn't own a yacht. The company he claims is so poor does. That company gets money from the state and uses it to buy yachts.

The second issue is that Benson claims that he cannot make money in football in New Orleans. He claims that he needs the state funding to keep up with the other NFL teams. But what does he do with that money? Invest it in marketing efforts? Hire new staff? Drum up corporate sponsors? No, he buys a $15 - $20 million toy for himself with money that came from the state. That is not OK, which is why the rest of the world shook their heads when that story broke.


Tom Benson is a sleezy car salesman who is using sleezy tactics. Even you said that he isn't telling the truth. Regardless of what you say, there is a difference between playing it close to the vest and lying. Benson is NOT as poor as he claims to be. He did NOT get a bona fide $1.2 Billion offer from an investor. Lying in negotiations is not OK. It's bad faith. Benson is a sleeze and he's doing whatever it takes to get rich off of tax payer money.

saintswhodi 05-17-2005 04:37 PM

Saints, state millions apart


By MICHELLE MILLHOLLON
mmillhollon@theadvocate.com
Capitol news bureau

How close did the state get to reaching a deal with the Saints?
The gap can be measured in the millions of dollars.

As New Orleans Saints owner Tom Benson recharged at a religious retreat, the Blanco administration Friday released the details of the offer he rejected earlier in the week. Officials also revealed the NFL franchise's counteroffer.

Gov. Kathleen Blanco wanted the football team to kick in $40 million to a $174 million Superdome renovation and to agree to a $14 million cut in cash payments from the state beginning in three years.

The Saints only offered to shell out $17.5 million for renovations and wanted $4 million more a year in cash than the state was willing to pay, said Tim Coulon, the governor's point person on the negotiations.

"And it's important to note, as well, that when we talked about the $4 million difference, we asked the Saints to substantiate the need," Coulon said.

"Let me repeat, substantiate the need as opposed to a want. That was never forthcoming," Coulon said.

Saints spokesman Greg Bensel said the team would decline comment on the negotiations.

Blanco asked the Saints to pay $40 million to spruce up the Superdome. The team had offered to spend that amount in their 2003 proposal, which a previous governor rejected.

Blanco had agreed to help fund the improvements with an eye on making the Superdome more profitable through renovations, such as, better seating and more concessions.

The franchise did not want to take the risk that their profits would increase after the renovation, preferring the guaranteed cash payments instead, Coulon said.

"They've got a contract for another seven years," Superdome manager Doug Thornton said. "They're entitled to receive $140 million and to convert some of that to earned income presents a risk to them. That's it."

Blanco wants the Saints to open their financial books to show why they need millions from the state. The Saints have resisted her request, arguing that only the publicly owned Green Bay Packers disclose their finances.

Blanco's predecessor, Gov. Mike Foster, tripled the subsidies the Saints receive in 2001. He brokered a deal that guaranteed $186 million to the team over 10 years, in addition to previous incentives.

New Orleans area hotel/motel tax collections were supposed to cover the cost of the deal. Tourism plunged in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, causing the state to struggle to pay the subsidies.

The subsidies include a sliding scale of annual cash payments that reach $23.5 million in the final years of the contract. Last year, the state raided an economic development fund to pay the team. This year, the state expects to be $9 million short of the $15 million due in July.

The cash crunch prompted Blanco to huddle with the Saints on restructuring their deal with the state. She dangled a $174 million Superdome renovation as an enticement for accepting less money from the state.

Other points in her offer:

n The Saints would pay $800,000 a year in rent for the Superdome.

n The state would pick up the tab for the $1.4 million a year in game-day expenses and the $14 million a year it takes to operate the Superdome.

n The Saints would keep the revenue -- about $15 million a year -- from parking and concessions.

n The Saints would agree to stay in New Orleans through the 2025 NFL season.

n The state would honor the current contract until the completion of renovations

n In three years, the state's payment to the team would drop to $9.5 million and increase 2 percent a year after that.

Benson turned down the offer Wednesday in a letter posted on the team's Web site.

He acknowledged a challenging economic marketplace but cited the increasingly competitive economics of the NFL. Despite the mutual agreement to keep the negotiations private, Benson says he discussed the talks with the league, other NFL owners and his family before deciding to reject the offer.

"At the conclusion of the Saints season, we once again look forward to continuing our dialogue with the state," he wrote.

Blanco doesn't want to wait that long. She called Benson's office Thursday in an effort to have "one last conversation." She was unable to reach Benson, who was said to be at a religious retreat.

Saints' Executive Vice President Arnold Fielkow said Friday that Benson will be out of state for at least a week.

He said he doesn't know if it will be possible for Blanco to speak to Benson while he's out of town.

Coulon said the Saints probably want their fans to speculate they'll now leave the state.

That fear gives them leverage in lobbying for more money from the state, he said.

When Benson bought the team in 1985, he signed a deal with the state to keep the Saints in New Orleans until 2006. Instead of sticking with the original deal, he has returned to the negotiation table about every four years.
By 2011, state inducements for the Saints will total a projected $376 million, dating back to 1985.

The lesson, Coulon said, is that for the Saints, a deal is never a deal.

VooDoo 05-17-2005 04:42 PM

whodat

I have owned a business for many years and I must tell you that you are not looking at things from a business standpoint. The fact that Tom Benson made a purchase under his company's "corporate umbrella" isn't underhanded or unusual. Do I need a link on tax laws to prove I'm right on this or do you agree?

Furthermore, if I wasTom Benson I wouldn't open my books to a goverment agency either. That's asking for trouble and no good can come out of it if your name is Tom Benson. I do not trust goverment to tell me how much profit I am making. I suppose you've got a little more faith in the Louisiana State Government than I do. That, however, doesn't mean Benson is suspicious. It just means he's been around the block and knows better. Can you blame him?

And again, I don't think the most gullible person in Louisiana thinks Benson is telling the complete truth about his finances. Benson wants a new stadium so he can make as much money as the other owners. The other owners have received financal help from their States. Benson is just following standard practices. Surly you understand that?

You can use whatever you find to make Benson out to be the bad guy. That, however, is just your opinion based off the facts that you wanted to find.

Like I said, there is no right or wrong. Only the way you feel about the situation.

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 05:03 PM

I feel that Benson is a crooked, old, greedy bastard.

VooDoo 05-17-2005 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyRo
I feel that Benson is a crooked, old, greedy bastard.

Scotty, you're from Monroe, Louisiana ... correct? I was recently there. Terrible economic situation in Monroe. Schools over-crowded. Businesses packing up and moving away (State Farm and CHASE MANHATTAN BANK)

What's the sale tax rate in Monroe? TEN PERCENT, I believe?

Property taxes are through the roof. And they just tried to raise taxes in Monroe and the surronding areas last month, I believe.

But, how's that charity hospital doing? How 'bout all those government handouts? How 'bout all that waste?

You think Benson is a crooked, old, greedy bastard? I think more attention should be focused on Blanco on the state government if you want to find the crooks and the greedy bastards.

spkb25 05-17-2005 05:22 PM

voodoo i love your post and i am with you. especially on the fact that you have a time share in your companies name as a write off. i am just now reading a book on starting a corporation and the tax benefits of doing so. to me what everyone wants to do is attack benson because he is rich. well he is rich because he worked hard. not many people are able to get rich sitting on their behind. you dont punish someone for hard work. you reward them. at times in this country it seems to be quite the opposite.

i would give this example. you have two sons. one does a lot of yard work and earns 80 dollars per month. the other does nothing. so as a father or mother what you would do then is take 20 dollars from the hard worker and give it the son who does nothing.

my example has nothing to do with benson but a lot to do with the rich and poor dilemma in this country. that does have a lot to do with the states argument in my opinion.

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VooDoo
Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyRo
I feel that Benson is a crooked, old, greedy bastard.

Scotty, you're from Monroe, Louisiana ... correct? I was recently there. Terrible economic situation in Monroe. Schools over-crowded. Businesses packing up and moving away (State Farm and CHASE MANHATTAN BANK)

What's the sale tax rate in Monroe? TEN PERCENT, I believe?

Property taxes are through the roof. And they just tried to raise taxes in Monroe and the surronding areas last month, I believe.

But, how's that charity hospital doing? How 'bout all those government handouts? How 'bout all that waste?

You think Benson is a crooked, old, greedy bastard? I think more attention should be focused on Blanco on the state government if you want to find the crooks and the greedy bastards.

What does the situation in Monroe have to do with my feeling that Benson is crooked, old and greedy? (My wife says I don't have any information that I can substantiate that Benson is illegitimate so I can't call him bastard anymore.)

Speaking of government handouts and waste...How about those annual payments made to Benson?

spkb25 05-17-2005 05:41 PM

scotty ro why is he greedy because you say so. because he wont part with his money. that you think he has enough so there for he should be more then willing to part with it. maybe other people should work for their own and not take from someone else. i would be also willing to bet that benson probally donates a lot of money. most of the rich do. most big corporations donate a lot of money to the community.

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spkb25
scotty ro why is he greedy because you say so. because he wont part with his money. that you think he has enough so there for he should be more then willing to part with it. maybe other people should work for their own and not take from someone else. i would be also willing to bet that benson probally donates a lot of money. most of the rich do. most big corporations donate a lot of money to the community.

I didn't say Benson IS greedy. I said I feel that he is greedy. The first statement would be something I'd have to back up as fact. The latter is how I feel based on the information I think I have.

In my dictionary "greedy" is defined as wanting or taking all that one can get with no thoughts of others' needs; desiring more than one needs or desrves.

"No thoughts" is a little vague. Does it mean never thought of or simply in disregard thereof? Thus that doesn't disqualify him as greedy.

Benson is definitely trying to get all that he can disregarding the needs of the state. I think it is fairly obvious that he will make a deal that has the state make nothing, if he can.

I think it is equally obvious that he is desiring more than he needs. He is claiming his team is poor, but Forbes disagrees.

Similarly, I think he is desiring more than he deserves. We are a funny bunch, we fans. We are dedicated to a team that has not delivered a scintilla of a product that it should have. One playoff win in 37 years? That's hardly return on investment that the fans and the state have made. We have one playoff appearance in the last 12 seasons or so? Seems like Benson has delivered less and less over the course of his ownership while demanding more and more.

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 06:22 PM

double post, sorry

BlackandBlue 05-17-2005 06:28 PM

Quote:

(My wife says I don't have any information that I can substantiate that Benson is illegitimate so I can't call him bastard anymore.)
That's funny

On another note...

Even though a chameleon can change it's colors to disguise itself against predators, deep down inside, it's still a ****ing lizard.

spkb25 05-17-2005 06:41 PM

i did not realize benson owned the team for 37 years. just my reply scotty ro on your statement of one playoff win in 37 years. i could be wrong but i didnt think benson owned them the entire time. from what i remember reading is that the team has been more successful under benson than any other owner.

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 06:54 PM

It's true enough that Benson did not own the team the whole time. 1 playoff win in 20 years isn't any better. 1 playoff appearance in the last 12 seasons is even more a travesty. Since '86 or so, the performance of the team peaked early and has been steadily declining ever since. He got four playoff appearances in 7 years and has since gone 12 with one more. All the while he has asked for more and more money, better and better deals.

WhoDat 05-17-2005 07:31 PM

Some more interesting facts on Benson and his attorney... Sound like a couple of standup guys to me.

Rosenberg
"But by the late 1980s, the real estate boom on which Rosenberg had helped build the firm's prestige went bust. In 1991, the firm announced Rosenberg was no longer a shareholder or full-time lawyer in the partnership. It was but one in a series of setbacks for Rosenberg, with two of his ventures filing for Chapter 11 and three of his business partners in ill-fated deals being convicted of felonies.

David Saks and Doyle Spruill were convicted for savings-and-loan fraud, and Connie "Chip" Armstrong was convicted of swindling companies of more than $60 million in a payroll tax scheme. Rosenberg faced no charges in either case. "
http://www.nola.com/saints/t-p/index...1386658880.xml


So since 1991 Rosenberg has been removed as a partner and investor in his own firm, sent two other companies to chapter 11, and his partners were convicted of tax fraud totaling $60 million!! Oh yeah, he's trustworthy, and clearly a great businessman.



How about that poor poor Tom Benson?

"In the past 20 years, no NFL owner has put less of his own money into stadium costs.

And no owner receives the kind of annual subsidy from the state that Gov. Kathleen Blanco is offering, a subsidy that would keep the Saints no worse than the top half of a 32-team league in net revenue."
http://www.nola.com/saints/t-p/index...1383218880.xml


Poor Tom Benson. He has the BEST subsidy of any NFL owner. He pays no rent and basically nothing in stadium up-keep. He gets tons of additional subsidies through parking at the Dome, concessions at the Dome, the state doesn't tax ticket sales, and the State has agreed to sell the naming rights of the Dome to pay Benson.... and his corporation can only afford to buy him a 122 foot yacht days after receiving direct state payments. You're right, he is just a businessman looking out for his interests. Sure seems like his $1.2 Billion offer wasn't total BS. Afterall, it did come from his tax-fraud attorney. And don't listen to what the San Antonio media and government officials are saying. They really do want Tom to move there. They have the money. And forget the fact that Tom Benson is the chair of the NFL finance committee. He doesn't really know anything about financing. He's just a poor ole businessman trying to do right by the State of LA by keeping his team there for the low-low rate of somewhere in the area of more than $737 million over the next 20 years, b/c he knows how important it is to us fans and the taxpayers. Give me a f---ing break.

VooDoo 05-17-2005 07:57 PM

I applaud WhoDat's efforts. But how can anyone possibly take Gov. Blanco's side?

Benson took a deal in good faith from then Gov. Mike Foster. It wasn't the deal Benson wanted, as Benson wanted a new stadium, but it is one he agreed to take.

Since that time Gov. Blanco asked Benson to renogotiate and give some of the money back. Benson had already counted on the money promised to him by the State. You just can't expect Benson to say ... "okay, here's the money back".

Keep in mind that Benson wasn't the one complaining and asking for anything. It was Gov. Blanco who called Benson up and started this whole process.

And, Blanco has treated Benson with so much disrespect. As the ol' sayin' goes ... you catch more flies with honey. Blanco is trying to catch flies with vinegar!! She comes across as rude and disrespectful.

Benson and the New Orleans Saints have a huge economic effect on New Orleans and the State of Louisiana. Without the Saints, there will be no more super bowls played in New Orleans. The money alone generated by all the superbowl would pay for a new stadium.

Benson is holding all the cards. Blanco, on the other hand is bluffing. All Blanco can do is piss off Tom Benson and make him sell the team to somone outside the state.

If Benson really wants to cash in a live the rich live, he should sell the Saints. That's what a greedy bastard would do. And that's probably what some of the Benson's critics deserve. Benson deserves a little more respect than that.

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VooDoo
If Benson really wants to cash in a live the rich live, he should sell the Saints. That's what a greedy bastard would do. And that's probably what some of the Benson's critics deserve. Benson deserves a little more respect than that.

The likelihood is that at least for the foreseeable future Benson will be able to seel the team for the current value. So, the greedy owner wouldn't sell now. The greedy owner would continue to line his pockets with the state's money for the next several years and then sell or move or whatever.

You've said yourself, VooDoo, that Benson doesn't need the state's money to be rich so he shouldn't need to sell the team to live the rich life.

My problem with this whole thing is that even though Benson is getting this money to be "competitive" in the NFL, he hasn't been competetive, but rather he has been mediocre. Other than winning for pride sake, what does he have to motivate him to make the moves necessary to win? Every other owner must win to make money. Not tommy boy.

VooDoo 05-17-2005 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyRo
Quote:

Originally Posted by VooDoo
If Benson really wants to cash in a live the rich live, he should sell the Saints. That's what a greedy bastard would do. And that's probably what some of the Benson's critics deserve. Benson deserves a little more respect than that.

The likelihood is that at least for the foreseeable future Benson will be able to seel the team for the current value. So, the greedy owner wouldn't sell now. The greedy owner would continue to line his pockets with the state's money for the next several years and then sell or move or whatever.

You've said yourself, VooDoo, that Benson doesn't need the state's money to be rich so he shouldn't need to sell the team to live the rich life.

My problem with this whole thing is that even though Benson is getting this money to be "competitive" in the NFL, he hasn't been competetive, but rather he has been mediocre. Other than winning for pride sake, what does he have to motivate him to make the moves necessary to win? Every other owner must win to make money. Not tommy boy.

Hey, winning and losing has nothing to do with anything. Benson doesn't force you or anyone else to buy his lousy product. You do that, Scotty, of your own free will. Don't blame Benson.

It's pretty obvious to me that "greed" isn't Benson's motive. Benson is an old man with not much longer to live. Maybe he just wants to create a legacy by having a new stadium built.

I think fans are dumping on Benson because of the lack of success on the field. Benson has spent the money it just hasn't worked out.

Keep on not supporting Benson and you may not have a team to root for in the future.

How Benson got to be the villian in this deal is beyond me. The sorry State fo Louisiana needs to put some of that money towards something constuctive. For a broke state ... Louisiana sure does waste a bunch of money. And sometimes they don't even know how much money they have. Louisiana is a terrible place to do business. And Blanco, IMHO, is making it much worse!!

TheJudge 05-17-2005 09:31 PM

Re: In response to WhoDat's Blanco vs. Benson
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by VooDoo
Benson wants the Saints to stay in Nawlins

benson just wants what is best for benson and will take it no moatter where the team is.. he has been holding this state hostage for years over this crap.... let the team go to NM and lets see just how great that would be for him.....i cant believe he hasnt given up the riens yet, guess we will have to wait until the unevitable happens before he releases his hands from around the states throat....

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 09:38 PM

Winning and losing has everything to do with it. No, I am not forced to buy the product, but I do after being promised a certain performance level - which is rarely attained. Thus, I have a right to complain about the product. What's more is that Benson has asked for this money to be more competitive, but his team hasn't been so. In fact, the Saints have only gotten worse since he initially asked for it following the 2000 season. I've suspected for a while that he intentionally mjisleads with words like "more competitive" because we think he means on the field when the truth is that he means on paper - as in his total revenue versus the other owners.

The problem again is that he has less motivation for winning because he is being subsidized whether or not he wins. The proof is in the FO. He continues to employ a bean counter as GM - disregarding the team's need for a solid GM. He has continued to employ Haslet even after Haslet's teams have gone 4 years since making the playoffs and have looked horrible at points during each of those seasons.

Lastly,

Quote:

Keep on not supporting Benson and you may not have a team to root for in the future.
This is the exact sort of propaganda he wants us to believe. Ignore the fact that it's a poor deal and just pay the money because the mighty Tom Benson might move the team. Yeah, I'm shaking in my boots. He's not moving the team anywhere unless the state breaches the contract. Even then he might only sue for breach and liquidated damages and stay where he is. No, that one is not working on me.

VooDoo 05-17-2005 09:46 PM

Scotty,

You have every right to complain about whatever area of the team you wish. But Tom Benson has a right to do whatever he wishes with HIS team.

You think Benson is ripping the State of La. off? Stop following the Saints and make Benson suffer. Stand up and be counted. Make a stand. Don't watch the games, don't buy any Saints' merchandice, don't buy any tickets to the game. Show ol' Tom you can hit him where it hurts.

Demand a better performance and only then will you support Benson's efforts. Show 'em Scotty.

Just be careful that Benson doesn't ride ride out of New Orleans with the Saints.

I take very little comfort in your "beleifs" that he won't do anything. Selling the team looks like a pretty good option to me. What makes you so certain Benson won't get pissed off and sell?

AND?

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 09:58 PM

I take very little comfort in your belief that selling is a good option.

Quote:

Stop following the Saints and make Benson suffer. Stand up and be counted. Make a stand. Don't watch the games, don't buy any Saints' merchandice, don't buy any tickets to the game. Show ol' Tom you can hit him where it hurts.
Why? Why not watch the games and root for the team and still criticize Benson's actions. I'm not trying to run the team out of town. I just want what I think is a fair deal. (Of course, it doesn't really matter what I think. I understand that, but what's the point of a forum if we don't speak our minds.)

But the threats don't bother me. If Benson doesn't like things, then let him sell or move. I'll get over it. I don't want him to, but I'm not going to kiss his heinie because I'm scared that he will.

VooDoo 05-17-2005 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyRo
I take very little comfort in your belief that selling is a good option.

Quote:

Stop following the Saints and make Benson suffer. Stand up and be counted. Make a stand. Don't watch the games, don't buy any Saints' merchandice, don't buy any tickets to the game. Show ol' Tom you can hit him where it hurts.
Why? Why not watch the games and root for the team and still criticize Benson's actions. I'm not trying to run the team out of town. I just want what I think is a fair deal. (Of course, it doesn't really matter what I think. I understand that, but what's the point of a forum if we don't speak our minds.)

But the threats don't bother me. If Benson doesn't like things, then let him sell or move. I'll get over it. I don't want him to, but I'm not going to kiss his heinie because I'm scared that he will.

Oh, I thought you were serious about Benson ripping off the State of Louisiana. If I thought that someone was ripping Louiaiana off, I don't think I would support and do business with that company anymore.

If GM was ripping the State off, I'd be buying a Ford. If the New Orleans Saints was holding my state hostage .. I don't think I could support that team in good faith. Or if I did ... I would come across as hypicritical.

ScottyRo 05-17-2005 10:24 PM

Now I'm a hypocrite. This from the same guy that went ballistic earlier today when he thought, incorrectly, that someone was calling him out for setting a trap. That's almost - dare I say - hypocritical.

I consider myself more conflicted than hypocritical.

Is it hypocritical to state that you believe that the FO has not done enough to make the team into a winner, but still hope like heck they win each and every game?

In the same way I don't think it is hypocritical of me to have disdain for the way Benson is negotiating with the state while still hoping the team wins and buying the team's merchandise.

Maybe I am a hypocrite...just like tommy boy.

VooDoo 05-17-2005 10:41 PM

Scotty,

I'll take your word that you're "conflicted" on this issue. Although you sounded pretty sure of your feelings earlier in the conversation.

It sounded like you were a man of principle. I was merely making an observation based on your comments in which you basically said Tom Benson is ripping the State off.

It was just very hard for me to understand how you complain so loudly about Tom Benson's business ethics but support his company (Saints) to a fault.

Maybe you really don't believe Benson is ripping anyone off at all? Maybe you just think he could hanlde the situation better?

I think, Scotty, if you really thought Benson were a thief that you wouldn't support the team.

Forgive me for making reference to hypocrisy. That would be saying one thing with your words but doing something totally different with your actions.

My bad.

lynwood 05-18-2005 07:46 AM

I wouldn't buy a car from his dealership. This guy that has renegotiated deals from the start is no good. I do appreciate that he came to the rescue to purchase the saints to keep them in the state, but to make the state pay for the team to be there,and to make the state pay for a new stadium doesn't make sense. He is just using a sales pitch that ,"someone else is looking at the car", if you are interested you should buy now. He is smart by trying to make the fans put political pressure on Blanco to work out the deal, unfortunatly the fans are all primarily around the new orleans area and not the whole state. I'd be willing to bet that the dallas fans in north louisianna outnumber the saints fans in southern louisianna.

ScottyRo 05-18-2005 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VooDoo
Scotty,

I'll take your word that you're "conflicted" on this issue. Although you sounded pretty sure of your feelings earlier in the conversation.

It sounded like you were a man of principle. I was merely making an observation based on your comments in which you basically said Tom Benson is ripping the State off.

It was just very hard for me to understand how you complain so loudly about Tom Benson's business ethics but support his company (Saints) to a fault.

Maybe you really don't believe Benson is ripping anyone off at all? Maybe you just think he could hanlde the situation better?

I think, Scotty, if you really thought Benson were a thief that you wouldn't support the team.

Forgive me for making reference to hypocrisy. That would be saying one thing with your words but doing something totally different with your actions.

My bad.

I am not conflicted in my belief that Benson has used extortion tactics to get the current deal and continues to use them to enforce it. You seem to have bought in fully to his propaganda threats of moving and that's ok. I happen to think they are idle threats, but that doesn't mean he wont move in the future. I am conflicted because I dislike what he is doing as owne of the team, yet I still plan to watch the games, which means support the team.

In the use of extortion tactics to secure his deal, I do think he has somewhat "ripped off" the state. Not only because of the threats but also because he claims to need it to be competitive, but Forbes suggests he is in the top 10 easily. That seems a bit off to me. However, I have said in the past that the state should continue to make the payments because the deal was made in a procedurally correct manner.

That doesn't mean that I shouldn't watch the team. Maybe that is hypocritical. Maybe not. I don't think it is any different that criticizing the FO for things they do and still watching the games and buying the merchandise. I don't think it's different than questioning play calling or other coaching decisions and still watching the games and hoping for a win.

If criticizing Benson on this issue makes me hypocritical when I support the team, then so be it. I will be in comfort that these other issues make other fans equally hypocritical and, therefore, not alone.

WhoDat 05-18-2005 08:55 AM

Winning and losing have nothing to do with it? Scotty is exactly right. Yes VooDoo, the FANS are the ones actually buying the crappy product that the Saints are selling. And it's so crappy, if you listen to Tom Benson, that the fans don't buy it enough for him to make money.

So who is paying Benson so that he can keep up with the other NFL Jones? Who is giving him the money he needs to be able to afford the types of yachts that other NFL owners can buy? The State of Louisiana. Is it OK then for the State of Louisiana to expect certain performance levels?


What's funny to me is that all these "red bloods" who take Benson's side and say that "a deal is a deal" and that Benson owes his business partner (the State of LA) no duty of disclosure or good faith, are also the people who generally oppose social programs like welfare.

Note to the Pro-Benson crowd: that is what Tom Benson is getting - corporate welfare. Entergy is a much bigger corporation than the Saints. They employ far more people and pump much more money into the state than the Saints. Do you hear them crying about the poor LA economy? Are they asking the state for handouts b/c other places have better economies? They might get tax breaks, true, but so does Benson... plus all of the State subsidies.


Anybody here really believe that a person on welfare should be able to get the money forever? Think that they "deserve" it simply b/c they asked for it? Think that they have a responsibility to try to better themselves, get a job, and get off of welfare? That's the entire idea of the system, right? Help out while people are down and help them get back on their feet, right? It's not supposed to be free money forever.

Well that is exactly what Tom Benson is asking for - and he's not even willing to prove that he needs or deserve the assistance. If a guy in a $700 suit walked into a welfare office and asked for a hand-out think he would get it? Think he could keep it? Think you would be suggesting that he deserves to keep it just b/c he asked for it???



It is true that Blanco approached Benson about reworking the deal. She approached him to suggest that the State lower its payment to the Saints, and IN RETURN, work out a stadium deal (which is EXACTLY what Tom Benson was asking for when he got this deal). She is trying to help the State's position, yes, but she has a responsibility as Governor to do just that. It's not like she's asking Benson to just give money back? She's asking him to take a lower direct payment in return for hundreds of millions of dollars in Dome renovations, additional direct payments, and incentives and income opportunities worth nearly $737 million.

Yeah, Benson is really a victim here. He's lying. His lawer is lying. He hasn't done a thing to prove he needs money - he's just stated that he does. Sure. I need money too, where's my subsidy?

WhoDat 05-18-2005 09:19 AM

Listen folks - there are only three possible reasons that I can think of that Tom Benson won't take the deal offered by the Governor.

1) It requires him to stay in New Orleans for 20 years without the out clause that the current deal has. Thus, he couldn't threaten to move the team again in 3 or 4 years to try to milk the State out of even more money (especially after being exposed this time around).

2) Some of the incentives in the agreement that would escalate the value to the Saints from somewhere in the $400 million range to somewhere in the $700 million range are based in part on how the team performs (on the field). If the Saints put winning/playoff teams on the field, their opportunity to earn incentives increases. Tom Benson has never been required to put a good product on the field before in order to milk the State for all its worth - why start now?

3) He's greedy. Deny this if you want, but how else can you justify this: Tom Benson wanted a new or rennovated stadium in 2000. He threatened to move the team and got the current deal from Mike Foster. Blanco has approached the Saints to modify the current deal. She's asking to lower the payments to $9 million annually (about 2/3 of what he's getting this year). So Tom gets to keep 2/3 of the current direct payments, which were given to him originally in lieu of a stadium deal. But the Governor is willing to let him keep his hand out, AND give him a rennovated stadium, AND MORE incentives than the team already has so that it can make even more money. Peter Finney at the TP called it the best deal in the league. Tom won't take it. You tell me why not, other than greed, inability to play his normal relocation hand every few years, and the realization that he would have to make his team a winner to really get paid.

spkb25 05-18-2005 10:30 AM

the funniest line of all theese posts is that benson just wants what is best for benson. im sure that none of us are like that!!!!!!!!!!!

WhoDat 05-18-2005 10:41 AM

Maybe we are - but are you willing to lie to get something that you don't need or deserve? I'm not.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com